Skip to main content

- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Microteaching Performance Assessment rubric

iRubric: Microteaching Performance Assessment rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Microteaching Performance Assessment Microteaching Performance Assessment This rubric is intended to assess the students' performance of their micro-teaching for the course ELT METHODOLOGY. It counts for 30% of the final mark. Rubric Code: CX47X44 By cybersue Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Education Type: Presentation Grade Levels: Graduate

Micro-teaching Lesson 20 %
	Very good 5 pts	Good 4 pts	Fair 3 pts	Needs improvement 2 pts
Objectives and Content	Very good The micro-teaching class is based on a clear aim. The objectives are well described. The content of the lesson coincides completely with the objectives. The unit is very original and creative.	Good The micro-teaching class is based on an aim. The objectives are quite well described. The content of the lesson coincides with the objectives although not always clearly. The unit is interesting but lacks creativity or originality	Fair The micro-teaching class is based on an unclear aim and doesn't coincide with the activity. The unit lacks originality and/or creatvity.	Needs improvement The lesson is not based on an aim and the objectives were not clear. The unit is not original or creative.
Instructional Components	Very good Direct Instruction, Guided Practice, Modeling, and oral communication practice are included and effective. Guiding Questions are incorporated into lesson	Good One of the following are missing and/or ineffective: Direct Instruction, Guided Practice, Modeling, and oral communication practice. Guiding Questions are incorporated into lesson	Fair Two of the following areas are deficient: Content of lesson appropriate to the age, meets the objective, and is engaging for students	Needs improvement Three of the following areas are deficient: Content of lesson is grade level appropriate, meets the objective, and is engaging for students
Material/Props/Tools	Very good The material used was age appropriate and engaging for the students. It provided hands-on practice.	Good The material used was age appropriate and engaging but didn't provide much hands-on practice.	Fair The material used was age appropriate but not engaging for the students. There was little or no hands-on practice.	Needs improvement The material used was neither age appropriate nor engaging for the students. There was no hands-on practice.
Oral presentation and English	Very good The speech presents no grammatical mistakes with focus language aims. The voice and presentation was clear at all times. All group members speak equally during the lesson.	Good There are some minor grammatical mistakes along the speech but they do not affect the focus language of the lesson. The voice and presentation was clear at all times. One group member does the majority of speaking.	Fair There are some important grammatical mistakes which affect the aims of the lesson. The voice was hesitant or unclear at times. Not everyone speaks during the lesson.	Needs improvement The speech can not be followed because of the amount of grammatical mistakes or it was not given in English.
Presentation and written work 10 %
	Very good 5 pts	Good 4 pts	Fair 3 pts	Needs improvement 2 pts
Online Presentation	Very good The online presentation was well organized and engaging. You presented the objectives and outline within the 8 min. The link to the online presentation was given and works	Good The online presentation was well organized and engaging. You presented the objectives and outline in more than 8 min. The link was given but doesn't work.	Fair The online presentation was quite well organized but not engaging. You presented the objectives and outline in more than 8 min. No link given	Needs improvement The online presentation was not well organized or engaging. It didn't leave us with a clear idea of your topic or objectives. No link given
Written	Very good The written work followed the template given and was well organized. It included: photocopies, images, game templates, examples, etc.	Good The written work mostly followed the template given and was fairly well organized. It included 2 of the following: photocopies, images, game templates, etc.	Fair The written work lacked some parts of the template given. and was fairly well organized. It included 2 of the following: photocopies, images, games templates, etc.	Needs improvement The written work was incomplete and not well organized. It included none of the following: photocopies, images, games templates, etc.

Keywords:

lesson plans, micro teaching

Subjects:

Types:

Presentation

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More Test Preparation rubrics

More Presentation rubrics

Do more with this rubric:

Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.

Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.

Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.

Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.

Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.

Assess

Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.

Share

Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.

Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubric^tm.

Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

n16